1 Denio (N. Y.), 175; Crane v. McLaw, 12 Rich. (S. C.) 129; but see Adams v. Stuart, 5 Harr. (Del.) 144; Bower v. Smith, 8 Ga. 74.

Similar statutes will be found in other states, which must be consulted when information is desired on this subject, in the state where it is required.

In Massachusetts, where the wife of the defendant, being affected by a dangerous disease, was carried by him to a distance from his residence and left under the care of the plaintiff as a surgeon, and after the lapse of, some weeks the plaintiff performed an operation on her for a cure of the disease, soon after which she died, it was held, in an action by the plaintiff against the defendant to recover compensation for his services, that the performance of the operation was within the scope of the plaintiff's authority if, in his judgment, it was necessary and expedient, and that it was not incumbent on him to prove that it was necessary or proper under the circumstances, or that before he performed it he gave notice to the defendant, or that it would have been dangerous to the wife to wait until notice could be given to the defendant: 19 Pick. (Mass.) 333.

If a physician carries a contagious disease into the family, on a suit for his services, this may be shown to defeat his right or to reduce the amount of his claim 12 B. Mon. (Ky.) 465.

And an agreement between physicians whereby, for a money consideration, one promises to use his influence with his patrons to obtain their patronage for the other, is lawful and not void as contrary to public policy: 39 Conn. 326; 12 Am. Rep. 390.

§ 119. Proof of a diploma from a medical college.

A diploma from a medical college may be proved by one who identifies the corporate seal and the genuineness of the signatures of the officers by a comparison with a diploma granted by the same college to himself and by those granted to others: Finch v. Gridley, 25 Wend, (N. Y.) 469.

CHAPTER X.

MEDICAL ETHICS.

§ 120. Code of medical ethics of the State of New York.

The Medical Society of the State of New York, in 1882, adopted the following Code of Medical Ethics:

As to the relations of physicians to the public, the code provides as follows:

66

It is derogatory to the dignity and interests of the profession for physicians to resort to public advertisements, private cards, or handbills, inviting the attention of individuals affected with particular diseases; publicly offering advice and medicine to the poor without charge, or promising radical cures; or to publish cases or operations in the daily prints, or to suffer such publications to be made; or through the medium of reporters, or interviewers, or otherwise, to permit their opinions on medical or surgical questions to appear in the newspapers; to invite laymen to be present at operations; to boast of

cures and remedies; to adduce certificates of skill and success, or to perform other similar acts. It is generally derogatory to professional character, and opposed to the interests of the profession, for a physician to hold a patent for any surgical instrument or medicine, or to prescribe a secret nostrum, whether the invention or discovery or [be the] exclusive property of himself or others. It is also reprehensible for physicians to give certificates attesting the efficacy of patented medical or surgical appliances, or of patented, copyrighted or secret medicines, or of proprietary drugs, medicines, wines, mineral waters, health resorts, etc: " Trans. Med. Soc. (N. Y.) 1882, p. 74.

As to the rules governing consultations, the code provides as follows:

"Members of the Medical Society of the State of New York, and of the medical societies in af. filiation therewith, may meet in consultation legally qualified practitioners of medicine. Emergencies may occur in which all restrictions should, in the judgment of the practitioner, yield to the demands of humanity.

"To promote the interests of the medical pro

fession and of the sick, the following rules should be observed in conducting consultations :

"(1) The examination of the patient by the consulting physician should be made in the presence of the attending physician, and during such examination no discussion should take place, nor any remarks as to the diagnosis or treatment, be made. When the examination is completed the physicians should retire to a room by themselves, and after a statement by the attending physician of the history of the case, and of his views of the diagnosis and treatment, each of the consulting physicians, beginning with the youngest, should deliver his opinion. If they arrive at an agreement, it will be the duty of the attending physician to announce the result to the patient, or to some responsible member of the family, and to carry out the plan of treatment agreed upon.

"(2) If, in the consultation, there is found to be an essential difference of opinion as to diagnosis or treatment, the case should be presented to the patient, or some responsible member of the family, as plainly as possible, to make such choice, or pursue such course, as may be thought best.